Umayyadsreduced.86223320

8/12/2019 Umayyadsreduced.86223320

1/28

METHOD ND THEORY

I

IN THE STUDY

'OF ISL MI ORIGINS

EDITED BY

HERBERT BERG

. .

BRIlL

LEIDEN'

BOSTON

2003


2/28

PROPHETS AND CALIPHS: THE BIBUCAL

FOUNDATIONS OF THE UMAYVAD AUTHORITYI

Ul'i Rubin

The Islamic preoccupation with the past is well known, and so is

the pivotal place Islam assigned to itself in world history, as well as

the Biblical patterns that Islam has appropriated for the documenta-

tion of that history.

In

the present paper a more detailed study of

one particular aspect of the Islamic engagement with the past will

be attempted, i.e. the past as an origin of legitimacy of authority.

This too has already been touched upon, but only within a general

discussion of other tools of legitimacy in Islam. Special attention

will be paid to the manner in which the Umayyads used the past

to legitimize their dynastic authority.

(

I

r

I

I

IA first draft of this paper was read in the workshop:Genesis and Regeneration ,

in The Israel Academy of Sciences and Humanities, Jerusalem, 2000.

2

For exam ple, Fran z Rosen thal, The In fluen ce

of

th e B ib lic al

Tradition on

Muslim Historiography , in Bernard Lewis

el

al. , eds., Historians

i f

the M idd le East

(Oxford: Oxford UniversityPress, 1962),35-45; and Azizal-Azmeh, Chronophagous

Discourse: a Study of C1erico-LegalAppropriation of the World in an Islamic tra-

dition, in Frank E. Reynolds and David Tracy, eds., R elig io n a nd P ra ctic al R ea so n:

Nn

E ssa ys in th e C om pa ra tiv e P hilo so p1 J

i f

Relig ions

(Albany, State University of New

York Press, 1994), 163-208. . .

3

See general observationson the relation between legitimacy and narratives about

the past in Fred ~I. Donner, Narratires

i f

Islam ic O rig ins: the Beginnings

i f

Is lamic

H i st or ic al l if il in g (Princeton: Darwin Press, 1998), 112-22.

Shortly before the final version of the present article had to be rushed to the

publishers, my attention was drawn to Wadad al-QaQi:'s study, The Religious

Foundation of Late Urnayyad Ideology, in S ab a re lig io soy poder politic o en el Islam :

A eta s d el sim po sio intemacional, Granada,

15-18

odubr

1991,

edited by Manuela MaIiQ

and Mercedes Garcia-ArenaI(Madrid:AgenciaEspaiiolade Cooperaci6n Internacional,

1994), 231-73. I am grateful to my colleague Dr. Camilla Adang for providing me

with her copy of this publication. Al-Qiigi:'sstudy is based solely on the letters of

'Abd al-Hamtd, bur nevertheless, most of her conclusions seem to be corroborated

by the present .paper.


3/28

l1RI RUBIN

I. P re-N atio nal O rig ins q f Islam

A study of the Islamic perception of the past must begin with some

observations regarding the origins of Islam as perceived by the believ-

ers. Islam sees itself as the most authentic representative of a uni-

versal, supranational religion that has formed an inborn component

of humankind since the first moment of Creation. This idea marks

a distinctive feature of the Islamic self-image, which since the great

Islamic conquests outside Arabia, became the ultimate justification

for the spread of Islam throughout the world. Embracing Islam meant

returning to the undistorted religious disposition that ought to have

led all people all their lives.

A clear manifestation of Islam as representing a universal and supra-

national religion is found in traditions about the

fitrah,

i.e. the natural

or inborn religion. This term occurs in the following utterance attrib-

uted to the Prophet: Every child is born in a state of

fitrah,

then

his parents make him a Jew or a Christian or a Magian.?

Fitrall

here stands for the inborn religious status. of a child, before external

religious education has turned him into 'a conscious member ofadis-

tinctive religious congregation. Mos r' Muslim schola~s are of theopin-

ion that this

fitrah.

is s)TIonymous with

Islam,'

which means that Islam

in the eyes of the believers stands indeed for the supranational reli-

gious framework of humankind. On the individual level it coincides

with a human being's first years of childhood. The fact that only

later on he becomes a Jew or a Christian, etc., means that fi rah as

identified with Islam, is not merely supranational but also pre-national.

The pre-national character of the fi rah/Islam comes out also on

the collective level.where it is identified with the first era of human

history as shaped in the Old Testament and adopted by Muslim his-

toriography. This is the era spanning between Adam and Abraham,

and it is pre-national because the forefathers of the people of Israel

were born only after Abraham.

Of the Biblical pre-national patriarchs, the one who is especially

identified in Islam with the idea of the fitrah, is Abraham. Before

S See Camilla Adang, Islam as the Inborn Religion of Mankii1d: the Concept

of fura in the Works of lbn Hazrn, a/ -Qg.n ara 21 (2000): 391~41O.

6 For example, Muhammad b. Isma'tl al-Bukhari, af-$allill, (Beirut: Dar

i\:tyll'

al-

turath al-tarabl, 1958),2:125 (23:93); AJ. Wensinck,

A Handbook oj Ear y M uhammadan

Tradit ion (repr. Leiden, EJ. Brill. 1971j,

s.v,

Religion .

1 For example, Ahmad b. Hajar al-'Asqalanf, Fa l{ a /- b ar f s h ar l: $a/:tr( al-Bukhi i t i

(Bftlaq: 1310/1892; reprinted Beirut: n.d.), 3:197-98.


4/28

PROPHETS A.'ffi CALIPHS

75

looking at the material bearing this out, it may be observed that

already in the Talmud Abraham appears as a self-made believer,

one whose religion came from within his own self:

R. Simeon b. Yohai said: His [Abraham's} father did not teach him,

nor did he have a teacher; whence then did he learn the Torah? The

fact is, however, that the Holy One, blessed be He, made his two kid-

neys serve like two teachers for him, and these welled forth and taught

him wisdom.?

Abraham's religion was embedded in him since childhood, as is clear

in the following Talmudic saying: Abraham was three years old

when he acknowledged the Creator. ... 9

In the Islamic sources as well the image of Abraham was molded

on the same pattern of an ideal believer, and as such he was identified

with the idea of the

fiirah:

The relevant material is contained in the

exegesis of Qur'an

2 : 1 24:

And when his Lord tried Abraham with

words and he fulfilled them .... A glance at the exegetical traditions

recorded in the ~ommentaries on this verse'? reveals that the

filrak

.. is explicitly labeled as Abraham's, and is described as .a system of

laws

of

purity, including

circumcision (khit i in), II

shaving o f hairy parts

ofthe body, paring the nails,

i2

ere, . . .

Not only Abraham, but Noah too is associated in the Talmud

with the idea of a supranational religion. This comes out in the idea

of (seven) laws usually known as the Noachian laws, ' i.e, the laws

enjoined upon the sons of Noah, which preceded the laws given to

Moses at Sinai, and are therefore obligatory upon all civilized nations

and individuals. Circumcision is also sometimes considered a Noachian

law, and Abraham, to whom the command of circumcision was given

in Genesis 17:9-i-,

as

well as his descendants until Sinai, are also

accounted the sons of Noah. H But in other passages circumcision is

a command fulfilled by Abraham apart from the Noachian laws.

IS

8

Gen es is R a bb a li

61 no. 1.

N ed arim

32a.

10

For example,JaHil al-Dtn al-Suyutr, al-Durr al-manthur

fi

al-tofsir bi-al-mdthiir

(Beirut: Dar al-rna'rifah li-al-tiba'ah wa-al-nashr, n.d.), L l l lf.

II

For which see

l\IJ.

Kister, : ... And He Was Born Circumcised.. .': Some

Notes on Circumcision&adi/h , Oriens

3~ (1994): 10-30.

12 See Kister, Pare Your Nails: a Study

of

an Early Tradition , Near Eastern

Studies in Memory of ~lM. Bravmann,

The

Journal

qf T he Ancient

Near

E aste m S acie ry

q f C olu mb ia Unicersuy

II (1979): 63-70. .

13 For example, Sanhedrin 56a.

H Sanhedrin 59a-b.

15 l oma

28b.


5/28

76

URl RUBIN

Whatever the case may be, Noah and Abraham appear in the Talmud

as adhering to a supranational system of laws, in fact, a pre-national

one, and pre-Moses in particular.

In the Old Testament and in the Jewish Midrash there is no con-

tinuous line yet in which the pre-national religion is forwarded through

the generations, and Noah and Abraham appear as isolated instances

of righteousness among generations of sin. This comes out clearly in

the two following passages from the P irk e A bo tlz:

16

2. There were ten generations from Adam to Noah to make known

how great is His patience: for all those generations continued to

anger Him until He brought upon them the waters of the Hood.

3. There were ten generations from Noah to Abraham to make

known how great is His patience: for all those generations con-

tinued to anger Him until Abraham our father came and received

the reward of them all.

Nevertheless, an idea about a successive line of a divine hereditary

legacy running along those primordial generations begins to emerge

inJewish Hellenistic literature from the Second Templeperiod. In

:it,'the unity of the human race betWeen Adam and Noah is high-

lighted, and the patriarchs living in each generation have become

links in a dynasty of leaders imposing their global authority on their

human contemporaries, and bequeathing it to their offspring.

Most instructive is the manner in which the pre-national age is

described in the apocryphal Book qf Jubilees,

11

which was composed

around 130 B.C.E. In Chap ter 7 :2 0-35 a list of seven laws enjoined

by Noah to his sons is provided, which is obviously an elaboration

on the Talmudic Noachian laws. In the present version they pertain

to observing righteousness, covering their flesh, blessing their Creator,

honoring their parents,

loving

their neighbor, avoiding fornication

and impurity, and not shedding or eating blood. Concluding his

address, Noah says to his sons:

For thus did Enoch, the father of your father, commandMethuselah,his

son, and Methuselah his son Lamech, and' Lamech commanded me

all the things which his fathers' commanded him. And I alsowill give

you commandment, my sons, as Enoch commanded his son in the first

16 Pirlee

Abah ,

5: nos . 2-3.

17 English version in R.H. Charles, ed.,

T he A po cryph a an d P seud eplgra ph a of th e O ld

T esta ment V ol. II , Pseudepigrapha

(Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1913).


6/28

'j

PROPHETS AND CALIPHS

77

jubilees: while still living, the seventh in his generation, he commanded

and testified to his son and to his son's sons until the day of his death.

I.

This passage conveys the idea that all humankind in the generations

between Adam and Noah was unified under one unchanging system

of laws, which were passed on from one ancestor to the other in a

ceremonial commandment. Noah's own commandment was formed

on the exact model of his ancestors.

The idea of a successive religious legacy recurs in the apocryphal

book of Enoch, known as

T he Secre ts o f E noch , 19

but here a most signi-

ficant component is added to the legacy, that is, sacred scriptures,

which turn the ancestors from lawgivers to prophets. The scriptures

possessed by them are called the books of their handwriting which

means that they committed to writing what was revealed to them

by God. The books that are listed here are of the handwriting of

Adam, Seth, Enosh, Kenan, Mahalalel, Jared and Enoch himself.

20

The latter is said to have written down 360 'scriptures that an angel

dictated to him.?'

.: These books are of a universal message, as is indicated by the fact

that God commanded that they be distributed children to children,

generation to' generation, nations to nations.l'P They contain~d all

the Lord's works, all that has been from the beginning of creation

and will be till the end of times. ' On the other hand, the scriptures

are also treated in Enoch as secret ones, and they illonly be revealed

to faithful people in generations to come. In another apocryphal

source, published as 1 Enoch , the scriptures are written by Enoch as

part of his last testament to his son Methuselah, whom he commands

to keep the books and hand them over to the coming generations.P

The history between Adam and Noah was treated not only in

religious apocrypha but also in the historical chronicle of Josephus

Flavius, known as

Antiquities

o f

the

]flt S

Here the ancestors between

I. BookofJubilees 7:38-39 in Charles,

T he

ApoayphaSee alsoUri Rubin, Prophets

and Progenitors in the Early Shl'a Tradition,

Jenisalem

Studies in Arabi, and

Islam I

(1979): 56. . .. .

19

The Book of the Secrets of Enoch [Version A], in Charles,

T Ie A p oc ry ph a.

20 The Secrets of Enoch,

33:

1O,.in Charles, The ApoCTJpha.

21 The Secrets of Enoch, 23:6, in Charles,

T Ie

Apocrypha.

22

The Secrets of Enoch, 33:9, in Charles,

T Ie

Apocrypha, Compare, Rubin,

Prophets and Progenitors, 58 n, .I03a.

23

The Secrets of Enoch, 47:2, U; Charles, T he ApoCTJpha.

24

The Secrets of Enoch,

35:2,

in Charles,

T h e A p oc ry ph a.

25

1 Enoch, 82: 1.


7/28

78

URI RUBIN

Adam and Noah are described as a. dynasty of political and admin-

istrative leaders. Enosh the son of Seth, says

Flavius,

when he was nine

hundred and twelve years old, delivered the government to Kenan

his son . About Jared the son of Mahalalel, Flavius says that his

son Enoch succeeded him. Enoch's son, Methuselah, delivered the

government to his son Lamech, and Lamech in his turn, appointed

Noah, his son, to be ruler of the people. Noah retained the govern-

ment nine hundred and fifty years. 26

In sum, the antediluvian ancestors between Adam and Noah, as

perceived in the above non-Islamic sources, form a successive line

of hereditary authority that is prophetic and religious as well as

administrative and political.

j

~

j

~

i

i

I

I

i

j

t

I .'.

j

f

I

;

II. T he

P re -N atio na l P ro ph ets in Islam ic H isto rio gr ap hy

This universal model became the prototype of the primordial version

of Islam. Accordingly, Noah .emerges in Islam as the founder of some

..basic Islamic precepts, which aredescribed as a-part ofhls last will

(w affYah).

A tradition

'enumerating

therri says that he gave his sons

two commands and two prohibitions. The commands were: l. To

say there is no god but Allah ; this is the first component of the

Islamic testimony of faith

(shahiidah).

2. To say God be praised

(al-

hamdu l i-A ll ii h) ; The two prohibitions were: 1 . Worshipping idols (shirk).

2. Arrogance (kibr)Y The fact that one of Noah's commandments is

to say the shahiidah points dearly to the identity between Islam and

the pre-national religion which has become its primordial model.

Moreover, in other traditions the universal pre-national religion is

called Islam . The most explicit of them is perhaps the one recorded

in Ibn Sa'd (d.

230/845) ,

in which 'Ikrimah, (a Medinan

maui l i :

of

Ibn (Abbas, d. lO51723) states: There were ten generations between

Adam and Noah, all of them Muslims (k alla bayna A dam wa-Nub

26

Josephus Flavius, T he L ife .an d W ork r q f F lav iu s Jo sep hus , translated by William

Whiston (Philadelphia: The John C. WinstonCompan)

n.d.),

Antiquities of the

Jews, 1:3, 4. See Rubin, Prophets and Progenitors, 56 with n. 95.

21 Fac;LIAllah al-jaylant,

Fadl Alliih al-samad fi /aWfb al-adab al-mufrad

l i -al -Bukhart

(Hims: al-Maktabah

al-islarruyah,

1969), 2:4-5. See also Abii Ishaq Ahmad b.

Muhammad al-Tha'labt,

Qirll al-anbtyii'

(Beirut: al-Maktabah al-thaqaflyah, n.d.),

51-52; Ahmad b. Hanbal,

al-Musnad

(Beirut: al-Maktab al-islami li-al-tiba'ah wa-

al-nashr,

1978),

2:

170,

225.


8/28

I

I

j

;

I


79

'ashratu quriinin, kullu-hum


9/28

80 URI RUBIN

two ends of the universal -chain of prophets. This correlation between

them has been noted in a tradition of Wahb b. Munabbih (Yemeni,

d. 110/728) on the authority of Ibn (Abbas. Wahb declares that

Adam was the first of God's messengers and Muhammad the .last.

Islamic historiography has also taken up the idea of an antediluvian

legacy being passed on from generation to generation in a hereditary

line. The hereditary aspect has become the most crucial feature of

the pre-national religion, which has provided Islam with the possibility

to connect Muhammad to the chain of prophets, and to make him

their most notable heir. In fad, Islamic historiography turned the

Prophet Muhammad into the final destination of the course in which

the divine legacy was forwarded from generation to generation, and

thus Muhammad's Islam became the final link in the sacred history

of God's religion.

The linkage between Muhammad's Islam and the pre-national reli-

gion of God determined the literary structure of the earliest available

historiographical works composed by Muslims of the first Islamic era.

. They begin their .historicalsurvey not with Muhammad, the putative

founder of Islam, .but .rather with the creation of the world and the .

. . history of its inhabitants; from Ada~ on,

I n

this mannervthey wished ..

to indicate that Muhammad's Islamic legacy was identical with the

divine legacy that was transmitted from generation to generation

since Adam.

The best example that bears this out is Ibn Ishaq, one of the first

systematic biographers of Muhammad (d. 1501768). His work is usually

kn own in the edition of Ibn H isham , but the latter does n ot con tain

the first part of the original work which has. only been preserved by

al-Tabarf in his famous Book of History (T ii'rfk h al-um am u ia -a l -

muliik).36 Al-Tabarf quotes Ibn Ishaq through the traditionist Salamah

b. al-Fadl (d. 1911807), whose version of Ibn Ishaq is considered

the most reliable one.F Most of the material quoted by Ibn Ishaq

in this part is derived from Jewish sources whom Ibn Ishaq often

calls people of the first book

iahl al-kitdb al-awwal),

i.e. the Torah.

b. Nusayy) (Syrian, d. 118/736) (- 'Ubayd ihn al-Khashkhash (- Abu Dharr al-

Ghilar (Companion, d. 321652-3) (- Prophet. See also al-Tabarl, T ii Tik h, 1 :1 51 ;

1:152), where Abu Dharr is quoted by Abn Idrls al-Khawlanf ('A'idh Allah b. 'Abd

Allah) (Syrian, d. 80/699).

35 Ibn Qutaybah, / liMb a i-ma 'l ir ij , 2 6.

36

Compare Rubin, Prophets and Progenitors, 57-58.

37 Compare Rubin, Prophets and Progenitors, 57 n. 101 (from

T i iT ikh Bag l Id i id ) .

38

For example, Tabari, TiiT ikh , 1:139; \:139-40.


10/28


81

Ibn Ishaq's account bears a considerable resemblance to the Book

if

Jubilees, especially with respect to the names of the old patriarchs'

wives, which he provides. They are identical to those recorded in

the

Book if Jubilees,

although they have been distorted in the avail-

able Arabic text of al-Taban.

39

The idea of hereditary authority is represented most clearly in Ibn

Ishaq's account as quoted by al-Tabari. Ibn Ishaq tells us that when

Adam. was about to die, he called his son Seth and appointed him

his heir. He informed his son of the approaching Deluge and wrote

his testament

(w~ryah)

for him. Seth acted as Adam's legatee

(w~ry)

and inherited the government (al-ri ' i isah) from him. According to a

tradition, which Ibn

Ishaq

quotes on the authority of

Muhammad,

God revealed to Seth fifty scriptures (~abifah).40

Thus the basic features of the hereditary authority as delineated

in the Jewish sources has been faithfully reproduced by Ibn Ishaq,

The ancestors in his description, too, are links in a genealogical line

of leaders who possess an authority of a clear prophetic, religious,

as well as administrative nature. Seth inherits government from his .

.'father, and God reyealsscriptures 'to him. .' .... '

. Ibn Ishaq says also that after writing his testament.vAdarri died and

the angels assembled around him because he was God's chosen per-

son

~qfiy

al-rabmiin) .41 This tide makes it clear that the persons pos-

sessing the hereditary legacy are not merely links in a successive

dynasty, but at the same time are also individuals chosen by God

for their holy mission. Hereditary succession and divine election are

therefore two complementary aspects of their authoritative status.

The hereditary legacy consists of some concrete emblems of author-

ity. Ibn Ishaq relates that Seth collected the items included in Adam's

legacy, among which was the horn

(qam)

that Adam had brought from

Paradise. They were put on lofty stairs

(mi 'rq j )

to make sure that. no

one forgot them.f

Seth was succeeded by Enoch, about whom Ibn Ishaq says that

he took oyer the administration of the realm (q iim a b i- siy iis ati a l- m ulk ),

and the guidance of the subjects under his control

iu a -tadbir

m an

tabla

39

See Rubin, Prophets and Progenitors, 58 n. 109; Franz Rosenthal, trans.,

T he H isto ry cf al-Tabart Volum e I: G enera l In troduction and From the C reation to the Flood

(Albany:State

University

of

New York Press, 1989), 317

n.

903.

10

al-Taban,

Tiirfkh,

1:152; 1 153.

H

al-Tabari,

Tiirikh,

1:159; 1 161.

12

al-Tabari,

Tiirfkfl,

1:159; 1 161.


11/28

82

URI RUBIN

yaday-h i min racfya ti- hi) . He continued in his father's way, and no one

ever noticed that he changed anything in it.43Here another crucial

feature of the legacy comes out, namely, that it ought to remain un-

changed, because change means deviation from the original and ideal

state of God's religion. Defending the legacy against change and

innovation is the divine duty of each person in the chosen dynasty.

Further on the people of the Torah are quoted concerning the

revelation of thirty scriptures to Enoch and about his combat against

the rebellious sons of Cain. It is stated that Enoch was his father's

legatee

( W l l, I ' y )

in accordance with what his father's forefathers had

enjoined (aw~aw) upon him and upon each other.r

Enoch, so another account from the people of the Torah goes,

before he ascended to heaven, appointed

i s t a l d z l a j a )

his son Methuselah

as his successor, to be in charge of God's government (Cala amr A ll iih )} 5

This is perhaps the most explicit manifestation of the two comple-

mentary aspects of the authority of the ancestors. They are both heirs

to their fathers as well as God's deputies who are in charge of His

government. Thus, the hereditary legacy forms the core. of God's

. religiorron earth. . .

From the people of the Torah it I s also reported that Lamech

was born to Methuselah, and Methuselah maintained his forefathers'

obedience to God and their faithfulness to God's commandments (Cuhiid).

When Methuselah was about to die, he appointed his son Lamech

as his successor (istakhlajO .) to be in charge of his government (Cala

amri-Izi), and enjoined upon him the same unchanging legacy as his

ancestors had enjoined upon him.

Historiographers later than Ibn Ishaq repeated the accounts about

the successive legacy of the antediluvian patriarchs. Ibn al-Kalbl

(Hisham h. Muhammad, d. 204/819), for example, provides an

account on the authority of his father, which is traced back to Ibn

(Abbas. It was recorded by Ibn Sa'd as well as al-Taban. Ibn al-

Kalbf delineates the successive transmission of the legacy (~ fyah)

from Seth to Enosh,. and. on to Kenan, Mahalalel, Jared, Enoch,

Methuselah and Lamech the father of Noah.

43 al-Tabarr, Tdrikh, 1:163; 1:164-65 .

..al-Tabarr, Tiirikh 1:170; 1:173.

45

al-Tabarr,

Tti1fkl , 1:172-73; 1:176-77.

46

al-Tabari ,

Tdtikh,

I: 173; I: 178.

47 Ibn Sa'd, Kiliih

al-tabaqat,

1:39,40; aI-Taban, Tiifikh, 1:163, 164, 174; 1:165-66,

179; Rubin, Prophets and Progenitors, 59.


12/28

l

I

i

I

I

~

I

l

I

I

I


83

As for the period from Noah to Abraham, neither Ibn Ishaq nor

Ibn al-Kalbr delineate

an

uninterrupted course of the hereditary legacy

during these generations. The reason seems to be that Abraham is

regarded as opening a period of his O\\TI, being a believer born to

pagan ancestors who could not act as bearers of any legacy of right-

eousness. The same applies to the above-mentioned Jewish sources,

where the successive line of the legacy is only described between Adam

and Noah.

However, the interest ~fuslim historiographers took in the successive

transmission of the legacy in the antediluvian period is evidence

enough that they regarded this period as the first stage of the history

of Islam itself, and that they considered Muhammad as heir to that

same unchanging legacy. That this was indeed so is indicated espe-

cially in the above traditions that identify the pre-national religion

with Islam.

III. T h e Is ra elite Prophets and M uham m ad

. .

. Muslim hi~iorio~phers have also dedicat~d much room to the period

spanning between the pre-national era and ~Iul;1ammad, which con-

sists of the history of the Jews and the Christians. Their prophets

provide the essential bridge linking between the pre-national era and

Muhammad himself

Ibn Ishaq's account of these prophets begins with Isaac the son

of Abraham, and ends with Jesus and his disciples.

Al-Tabari

him-

self, who quotes Ibn Ishaq's traditions about the Israelite prophets,

has interpolated among them additional traditions from other sources,

and in some of them ex-plicit mention is made of the transmission

of the legacy from one Israelite generation to another. Thus, for

example, the transition of the u a{fJah from Jacob to Joseph,s and

from Joseph to Judah his brother is mentioned explicitly.51

A detailed description of a successive authority running along the

generations since Adam, and continued through the Israelites, is pro-

vided by the shr r author al-Ya'qubf [d. 283/897). His History abounds

~8 al-Tabarf, Tiitikh, 1:317; 1:351-55.

~9

al-Tabari,

Tiirfkiz,

1:602-601: 1:737-39.

30 al-Tabari, Tiitikh, 1:361; 1:413.

,\ al-Taban, Tdtikh, 1:363; 1:413.


13/28

8

URI RUBIN

with quotations from the Bible and other Jewish and Christian

sources,52 and they form the axis around which his account of the

pre-Islamic history revolves. His work has been defined as the ear-

liest universal chronicle in Arabic in the sense of a work going from

the Creation down to his own tirne, 53 but this can only be true if

Ibn ISQaq is not taken into account.

Thus the Israelite prophets have become the intermediaries between

Muhammad and the pre-national stage of history. This means that

Islam has turned them into legitimate representatives of the primordial

religion of God.

The Muslims paid special attention to the relationship between the

last Israelite prophet, namely Jesus, and Muhammad, Chronologically

speaking, Jesus was the closest Israelite prophet to Muhammad, and

this closeness in time was turned in Islam into a blood relationship.

This is the intent of a tradition transmitted by Abu Hurayrah (Com-

panion, d. 57/677), in which Muhammad declares: I am the clos-

est person (awlii al-niis) to Jesus the son of Mary in this world and

in the world to come. When asked how this could be, the Prophet

went on explaining: The prophets an brothers born to fellow-wives

.(Cal{iit),.i.e.thdt

mothers are various and .their religion is the same.

There is no prophet between me and him. 5{

The prophets are likened here to sons of the same father by various

mothers, the father being the one unchanging religion of God that

unites them all, and this makes them brothers in the same religion,

and among them Jesus and Muhammad are the closest pair. Their

various mothers, so it was explained

by

some Muslim scholars, rep-

resent their various types of

shari/ah,

i.e. the distinctive religious laws

which differ from one monotheistic community to the other. 55

52 On Ya'qubt's sources for the Biblical period and especially the Arabic trans-

lation of the Syriac Book

if

lilt Cave

if

Treasures, see Adang, Muslim Writers on Judaism

and the Hebrew Bible: From Ibn Rabban to Ibn Hazm (Leiden:

EJ.

Brill,

1996), 117-20,

and the bibliography therein.

51 Stephen

R.

Humphreys,

Islamic History: a Framework for Illquiry

(Minneapolis:

. Bibliotheca Islamica,

1988), 75.. .

54

Muhammad

ibn Ahmad b.

Hibban al-Bustl, 'a l-Ihsiin

fi

taqtib abfb

Ib n

Hibbiin,

tattib 'A lii ' a l- Dt n a l- Fi ir is i, edited by Shu'ayb al-Arna'Iit (Beirut: Mu'assasat al-risalah,

1988), 14: no. 6194. See also Ibn I:Jibbiin, aH lsiinfi taqnb

a/.IrlJ,

14: no. 6195; al-

Bukhiiri,

al-Sa/.Iflz ,

4:203 (60:48); Muslim h. al-J:Iajjaj al-Qushayri,

al- a/.Iib

(Cairo:

Matba'at Muhammad

'Air ~ubay~

wa-awladi-hi, 1916), 7:96 (43,

B a b 1 m /a i i C l s a ) ;

Abii Dawud, al-Sunan (Cairo: Matba'at l\Iu~tala al-Babt, 1952), 2:522 (39:13); Ibn

Hanbal,

a l -Musnad ,

2:319, 406, 437, 463-64, 482,

and

541.

55 For example, Ibn J:Iajar,: Fatb al-bdri, 6:354.


14/28

PROPHETS Al\i) CALIPHS

The need' to emphasize the affinity of Jesus and Muhammad was

probably the result of the fact that Jesus was succeeded by several

generations of Christian disciples, of whom Islam was well aware,

as is indicated by the many reports about them in Islamic sources.

They can be traced mainly in the commentaries on various Qur>anic

verses, which were interpreted as dealing with the interval (Jatrah?6

between Jesus and Muhammad. In view of these reports about

Jesus' Christian successors, it may be assumed that the tradition high-

lighting Muhammad's own relationship tojesus was designed to imply

that Muhammad, rather than Jesus' Christian followers, is the most

authentic representative of the religious message of Jesus. The anti-

Christian polemical gist is clear enough here.

Just as Muhammad was said to have been the closest person to

Jesus, he was also presented as the dosest one to Moses.vandin this

case the polemical message is not anti-Christian but rather anti-

Jewish. It comes out in traditions recounting the history of the 'Ashiirii'

day. In some of them a relationship between this day and the Jewish

. Day of. Atonement is implied .. It is related that when Muhammad

came to Medina after his hijrah from Mecca, he found out that the

.. Jews of that city used to fasfon the day of '.Ashiira'. He asked. them

to tell him the reason for that, and they told him that this day was

a holiday because on it God delivered the Children of Israel from

their enemies, and therefore Moses had fasted on this day. Then

Muhammad said to the Jews: I am more worthy of Moses than

you are (ana

ahaqqu

hi-JIiisa mill-him), and thereupon he started to

fast on the day of'i\shura' and ordered the Musl ims to follow suit.

This means that the Islamic

ummah

and not the Jews are the most

authentic bearers of the legacy of Moses.

In another version, transmitted on the authority of Muhammad's

companion Abu Hurayrah, the history of

'Ashflra'

shoved even further

back, deep into the pre-national stage of history. The Jews explain

to Muhammad that this day was a holiday for them not only because

of God's salvation in the time of ~Ioses, but also because on that

>6

Compare Qur'an 5:19. .

57 The verses are mainly these: Qur'an 36:13(; 18:9[; 85:-. And see also Ibn

Sa'd, Ki/lib al-tabaqiit; 1:53.

56 al-Bukharl,

a l - a l , l i b ,

3: 5

i30:69);

Ibn H an bal,

a l - J / u f 1 I a d ,

1:2 91, 310. The

isnad:

Sa'Id b. Jubayr (Knfan, d.

951713-14)

f-

Ibn


15/28

.,

86

URI RUBIN

day Noah's Ark landed on dry land (on the mountain JudI), and

therefore Noah fasted in gratitude.

59

Thus the Islamic religious legacy

has been rooted in a universal channel encompassing Noah and

Moses and ending up with Muhammad,

Not only Moses but David too is a typical Jewish symbol of sal-

vation and victory, and here again Muhammad has been turned into

his worthiest heir. The traditions establishing the link between David

and Muhammad revolve around Muhammad's private belongings,

which formed an important part of his legacy. Among the effects he

left behind was the mail coat

(dir

C

), which protected him on the

battlefield, and according to a tradition, it was a legacy of David.

David was clad in it when he confronted Goliath/

All these traditions demonstrate the perception of Muhammad's

Islam as originating in the divine and unchanging legacy that God

entrusted with all the prophets since Adam. Therefore Muhammad's

Islam is the only faith to which all humankind should adhere.

In further traditions the concept of the unchanging divine legacy

that transmigrates through the generations. from.Adam to Muhammad

has been combined with the idea. of -Muhammad's .pre-existence,

.The successive legacy has been identified with Muhammad's own

pre-existent entity. Thus this universal legacy was entirely Islamized

in the sense that Muhammad became its first origin. The prophets

have become mere vessels carrying the pre-existent Muhammad. In

one of these traditions, recorded by Ibn Sa'd, the following state-

ment has been attributed to Muhammad:

I was brought forth from amongst the best generations of the sons of

Adam, generation after generation, until Iwas brought forth from the

generation in which Ilive. B u 'ith tu m in k hayr i q u r iin i b an A dam qom on

fa-qaman ~attii

bui thtu

m in

a l -qami

alladhi kuntu fi-hi .62

As already pointed out by Goldziher.f this tradition speaks about

the same prophet-i.e. the pre-existent Muhammad+-who has appeared

59

Ibn Hanbal,

al-Musnad,

2:359-60.

60 Abu Sa'd 'Abd ai-Malik b. AbI 'Uthman al-Khargtisht, Sharof al-nabt (~IS

British Library, Or. 3014), fo ' 161b; Ibn Shahrashub, Manaqib at Abf Jlilib [Najaf

al-Matba'ah al-haydartyah, 1956), 1:147.

61 For which see Rubin, Pre-Existence and Light, 62-119.

62 Ibn

Sa'd,

Kitab al-tabaqiit,

1:25.

Compare Rubin, Pre-Existence and

Light,

71-72. The i s n s d : 'Amr b.

Abr

'Amr

t =

Maysarah, a

mmu i a

of al-Muttalib b. 'Abd

Allah] (Medinan, d.

1 44 17 61 ) ~

Sa'Id al-Maqburi (Medinan, d.

1 23 17 41 ) ~

Abu

Hurayrah

Prophet.

63 Ignaz Goldziher, Neuplatonische und gnostischeElernente im Hadlt, Z e i t s c h r i f l

flir As~r io iog ie u nd te nu m dte Geb i e t e

22 (1909): 340.


16/28


87

among humans, generation after generation

(q am an fa -q am an ),

until

at last he arose as Muhammad.P' It follows that this tradition, which

also appears in Bukhari's

a J. l ' i lz ,

65

as well as in other

sources.

identifies

the divine legacy that has been transmitted from generation to gen-

eration not merely with Islam but also with Muhammad himself.

The course of its transmission is not confined to any specific era but

is infinite in the sense that it encompasses all human generations

which ever existed until Muhammad, The basic idea is that the gen-

erations along which the legacy passed were the best, i.e. they con-

stituted a chosen pedigree that reached up to Muhammad,

More traditions of the same intent can easily be pointed out by

recourse to the commentaries on a Qur'anic verse, 26:219. This

verse deals with the Prophet's movement ( taqal lub) among those who

prostrate themselves (al-sii j idin). A tradition of Ibn 'Abbas as recorded

by Ibn Sa'd says that the Qur'an speaks here about the transmi-

gration of Muhammad from prophet to prophet and from prophet

to prophet, till God brought him forth as a prophet.?

In sum, the idea of .divine authoritative legacy running along the

'generationsand delivered .to the people 'through the messages of the

various prophets has been identified with Muhammad's pre-existent

entity, which brings the concept of the universal origins of Islam to

its utmost elaboration.

IV.

The Umayyad Caliphs

The relationship established between Islam and the universal and supra-

national religion was designed to ensure legitimacy for the Islamic

domination over the older communities, i.e. theJews and the Christians.

The latter observed with astonishment the Islamic conquests that

brought to an end, their own hegemony in world history. To justify

this drastic change of authority caused by its takeover of old empires,

t I now realize that my criticism or Goldziher concerning the significance of this

tradition (Rubin, Pre-Existence and Light, 72 .n. 27) was unjustified.

65 al-Bukhari, al - $a~ f z , 4:229 (61:23).

66

Ahmad b. al-Husayn b. 'Air al-Bayhaqr,

Dali i ' i l al-nubiuuah,

edited by 'Abd al-

l\'u' f Qal'ajf(Beirut: Dar al-kutub al-'ilmiyyah, 1988), 1:175;al-Suyuu,

a l -K}uq i i' i; a l -

kubrii, edited

by

Muhammad Khalil Hams (Cairo: Diir al-kutubal-hadithah,

1967), 1:94 -.

67

Ibn Sa'd,

Ki ti ib a l- ta baqn t,

1:25. The

i s n i i d :

al-Dahhak b. Makhlad al-Shaybanf

(Basran, d.

ca . 212/827)

- Shabtb ibn Bishr (Halabi/Kufan)

f-

'Ikrimah - Ibn

'Abbas. See also Goldziher, Neuplatonische und gnostische Elernente im Hadlt,

340. Compare Rubin, Pre-Existence and Light, 80 with n. 78.


17/28

1

I

,

1

;

I

I

I

I

i

1

f

I

I

I

88

URI RUBIN

Islam had to anchor its own origins in the universal past. From there

it strove to draw legitimacy for its authority and confirm its iden-

tity as a community that has replaced Judaism and Christianity and

has become the new guardian of God's religious legacy.

But the Islamic link to the universal legacy of divine authority was

designed to serve not only external purposes but also internal neces-

sities. There were tensions and struggles within Islamic society itself

that were focused on the claim to authority. The various parties tried

to link themselves to the divine chain of universal authority, and

thus gain the status of the only legitimate guardians of God's eter-

nal religion.

The main parties to this struggle for authority in Islamic society

of the first Islamic era were two opposing dynasties, the Umayyad

and the snrr ones. Each tried to gain recognition as Muhammad's

exclusive heirs from whom they inherited the universal legacy that

he had received from the previous prophets. The Shr(r side of the

matter has already been clarified elsewhere.f but the Umayyad one

seems to deserve further consideration.

The Umayyads, whose center was in Damascus, Syria, were the

first to introduce dynastic goverrimenti~to.Islam.Theirdynastic rule

began in 41/661, after the period of the Righteous Caliphs whose

center had been in Medina (Abu Bakr, 'Umar, 'Uthman). The first

rulers of the Umayyad dynasty belonged to the Sufyani family, i.e.

the descendants of Abu Sufyan, father of Mu'awiyah, who was the

first

Umayyad caliph

(r. 41-58/661-80 .

The

Sufyants

were suc-

ceeded by the Marwant branch of the Umayyads, the first of whom

was (Abd al-Malik son of Marwan, who ascended in 64/684.

IV . 1 T he E vidence o f r

Valid :

Letter

The manner in which the Umayyads tried to base their own dynas-

tic authority on the hereditary legacy of the prophets is best reflected

in a letter sent to the garrison cities on behalf of the Umayyad caliph

\Valrd II

(r.25-261743-44)

concerning the designation of his suc-

cessors. The Arabic textwas preserved in al-Tabari's

Tii lfkh.

69

Various

scholars already noted the importance of the letter, and P. Crone

68 Rubin,

Prophets and Progenitors, 41-65. See aha Etan Kohlberg, Some

Shr'r Views on the Antediluvian World,

Studia [slamica

52 (1980): '1-1-66.

69

al-Tabarr, Tiirfkh 7:219-220; 2:1757.


18/28

PROPHETS AND OALIPHS

89

and M. Hinds carried out the most recent study of it. I believe,

however, that the letter still deserves examination because not all its

aspects have been noticed yet, let alone some errors in its English

translation as offered by Crone and Hinds. .

In this letter the caliph tries to anchor the dynastic principle of

hereditary authority in the past. The letter sees.in history two major

phases, or eras: Universal and Islamic.

The Islamic era in Walrd's letter begins with the Prophet Muham-

mad. This is not as obvious as it may seem, because Crone and Hinds

claim that in this letter the Islamic era does not begin with Muhammad

but rather with the caliphs who ruled after him. In their own words:

Al-Walid here sketches out a salvation history divided into two eras,

one of prophets and another of caliphs . Muhammad, in their inter-

pretation of the letter, represented the culmination of prophethood

and on his death the era of the prophets came to an end. The era

of the caliphs began when, bn the death of Muhammad, God raised

up deputies to administer the legacy of His prophets. Crone and

Hinds go on to stress .that What is so striking about .this letter is

that. caliphs are in noway subordinated to prophets (let alone t o the

Prophet). Prophets and caliphs alike are seen as God's agents,and

both dutifully carry out the tasks assigned to them, the former by

delivering messages and the latter by putting them into effect. The

caliphs are the legatees of prophets in the sense that they adminis-

ter something established by them, but they do not owe their author-

ity

to them (let alone to Muhammad on his own). Their authority

comes directly from God. 71

But in Walld's letter Muhammad does open the Islamic era, and the

caliphs, who represent God's religion among humans (which makes

them God's deputies), do owe their immediate status to Muhammad,

They are his heirs as guardians of God's legacy, just as he is heir to

the previous prophets. This comes out clearly in that passage of the

letter in which the emergence of Muhammad is described. It is stated

here that Muhammad emerged as a prophet at a time when knowl-

.. edge was obliterated and people were blind, with evil deviations and

frictions tearing them apart. Through Muhammad, so the letter says,

70

Patricia Crone and Martin Hinds, G od 's C alip h: R elig iou s A uth or ity in th e F irst

Centur i es

rff Islam

(Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990), 26-28. Full trans-

lation is provided in l IBf

71 Crone and Hinds,

G o d's C a lip h,

27.


19/28

9

URI RUBIN

God guided the blind and restored light to them, and through him

God revived the religion (w a-iJbhq ja hi-hi ai-din) . The letter goes on

to say that many of Muhammad's nation responded to him and

became adherents of the religion with which God had honored them.

No one of Muhammad's adherents was ever heard denying the truth

of God's message as revealed to the previous prophets, without being

punished by the believers for his disbelief.

Such an exposition of the situation into which Muhammad emerged

as a prophet leaves no doubt as to the role assigned to him here.

He is clearly the first religious leader in a new era in which belief

in God is renewed and the darkness of disbelief is turned into light

of knowledge and faith. This is evidently the idea, well known from

many other Islamic texts, according to which Muhammad's emer-

gence put an end to the ignorance of the

j iihitryah.

All this is recounted in the letter only to draw a comparison

between Muhammad and the caliphs who succeeded him. According

to the letter, the caliphs, like Muhammad, are meant to secure the

endurance of the revived religion that had been preached by all the .

prophets, and therefore everyone must-obey them; while God. Himself'

'will punish anyone who rejects them.

The caliphs, according to the letter, are God's deputies in the

sense that they must protect a divine legacy, but their actual author-

ity is explicitly hereditary. This authority is called in the letter amr ,

which term appears in the following passage of the letter:

''hen God took away His prophet and sealed His revelation with him,

He appointed his caliphs as His deputies in the vein of His prophet-

hood

(Calii minh i i j nu6 iiw a ti- hi) ... .

The caliphs of God followed one

another (fa-taliiba'a), adhering to the matter (amr) ofHis prophets, which

God had caused them to inherit

(awratha-hum),

and He appointed them

to be in charge of it on His behalf tua-stakhlofa-hum

'cloy-hi

mill-hu).73

The term amT, which here denotes authority , or government , recurs

in the above texts pertaining to the antediluvian stage of history. For

example, we have seen that Enoch is said to have appointed i s t a k h l r i f a )

his son Methuselah as his successor, to be in charge of God's gov-

ernment

(C a lii am r

Al lah) . Here, as in the letter,

amr

appears in jux-

taposition with istakhlofa, the verb that describes the appointment of

72 al-Tabari,

Tankh , 7:220; 2:1757-58,

Crone and Hinds provide a different, less accurate, translation of the passage.

Crone and Hinds, God s Caliph, 120.


20/28

-

PROPHETS AND .CALIPHS 91

a successor to be in charge of the legacy. Just as the antediluvian

ancestors were nominated by their fathers to be in charge of the

divine

amr ,

so the caliphs, according to the letter, were made by God

heirs to the prophets from whom they inherited their actual author-

ity as defenders of the divine hereditary legacy.

In fact, the letter itself refers to those remote stages of the past

and sees in them the starting point of the divine authority inherited

by the Umayyad caliphs through Muhammad. These stages are

described in the very first passage of the letter. The English trans-

lation of this passage in Crone and Hinds'

G od's C alip h

is erroneous,

and misses the idea of successive authority that is being conveyed

here. Due to this error, Crone and Hinds believe to find in the let-

ter support to their supposition that the Umayyads did not see them-

selves as Muhammad's heirs, only as God's deputies. The original

Arabic text is this:

ammi i bddu , fa - inna Allaha ... i k ht ara a l- is lama dinan li- nc fs i- hi io a-jaola-hu

dina

k ha yra ti -h i m i n khalqi-hi, th umma i: ltq fo . m in a l- m alii'ik ati r us ula n w a -m in

a l-ni isi ,

ja -baCatha-hum

bi-hi u a-a m ara -h um h i-h i;

too-k ana boyne-hum w a-

bayna - m a n m ad ii m in _a l -umami t ua -kha ld m in al-quri ini q a man ja -q a man ,

yadCi ina

ilii-mii

-hba absanu uia-yahdiina

ilii firii/in mustaqimin,

/ .Ia ttii in ta ha t -

ka t i ima tu Allahi fi nub iaoa t i -h i u a Muhammad i n M ...

H

Crone and Hinds render the passage as follows:

To continue, God ... chose Islam as His own religion and made it the

religionof the chosen ones of His creation. Then He selectedmessengers

from among angels and men, and He sent them with it and enjoined

it upon them. So there was between them and the nations which

passed awayand the generations which vanished, generation upon gen-

eration

[events

of the type described in the Qur'an, but they contin-

ued to?] call to 'that which is better and guide to a straight path.

Ultimatelythe grace of God [as manifested]in His prophethood reached

Muhammad ... 75

The words that Crone and Hinds add in square brackets are only

a suggestion by which they try to explain a sentence that they fail

to understand correctly. The sentence is this: __

W a-k an a b ay na -h um t ua -bayna m an mada m in a l-u ma mi tu a-k ha lii m in a l-

q u riln f q a man fa -qaman .

H

al-Tabari,

Ti irikh,

7:219; 2:1757.

75 Crone and Hinds,

God s

Cal ip~,

118-119.


21/28

92

URI RUBIN

The correct translation seems to be this:

It [i.e. the religion of Islam] remained among them [i.e. the messen-

gers] and among the past nations and the bygone generations, gener-

ation after generation ( q aman fo - q aman ) .

It is thus clear that this is a complete and coherent Arabic sentence

with no lacuna, in contrast to what Crone and Hinds have assumed.I''

The subject of the sentence is the same as the one to which the entire

passage is dedicated, namely the religion of Islam that God chose

to be His religion and made the religion of His chosen messengers,

whom He sent to preach it to their respective peoples.

The key words in the sentence are:

q aman

fa-qaman

which have the

same meaning here as in the above tradition about the transmigra-

tion of Muhammad's pre-existent entity through the generations of

the prophets. Here and there the idea is the same: the prophets have

belonged to a successive chain of a hereditary divine legacy, which

in the letter is identified as the Islamic faith and in the above tra-

ditionas the pre-existent Muhammad, In both instances the legacy

is unchanging,_ and is being forwarded to posterity, generation after

generation

( qaman fo - q aman ) , .

till the manifestation of

Muhammad's

own Islam.

In view of this, the proper translation of the entire passage seems

to be as follows:

To continue, God ... chose Islam as His

own

religion and made it

the religion of the chosen ones of His creation. Then He selected mes-

sengers from among angels and men, and He sent them with it and

enjoined

it upon them. It [i.e. the religion of Islam] remained among

them [i.e. the messengers] and among the past nations and the bygone

generations, generation after generation, [during which time] they [t.e.

the prophets] were caIling to that which is better and guiding to it.

straight path. [They continued to do this] till at last the grace of God

[as manifested] in His prophethood reached

Muhammad ...

In sum, the universal stage of the course of the hereditary legacy, as

described in the letter, reflects the same concept of hereditary authority

as witnessed in the above Jewish texts as well as in Ibn Ishaq, The

description of this stage in the letter is designed to furnish the author-

ity of the Umayyad dynasty with the remotest origins in the past. The

letter asserts that the caliphs who have inherited the universal legacy

76 Crone and Hinds, G o d 's C a lip h , 118-119 11. 3.


22/28

t

I

j

j

PROP:HE;TS AND' CALIPHS

93

of the prophets were put in charge of God's religion after Muhammad's

death, and their duty now is to protect it from distortion and pass

it on to the coming generations through their own chosen pedigree.

This is the reason why people are obliged to obey them, because

obeying them means obeying the eternal religion of God.

This is the appropriate context of the status of the Umayyads as

God's deputies. They are His deputies in the sense that they are

guardians of God's religion, but they only gained this status thanks

to the fact that God chose to make them Muhammad's legatees.

IV.2

T he E vidence o j U mayyad

P o e t r y

Authentic presentation of the Umayyad self-image may be found not

only in \-Valid's letter but also

in Umayyad

court poetry. It is authen-

tic 'in the sense that the poets praising the Umayyads created an

image for them that reflected what they liked to hear about them-

selves (and paid good money for). Here too Muhammad is placed

at the beginning of the Islamic era and the evidence for this per: '

ception is foundmainlyin the poetry ofFarazdaq (d. 112/730). ,

That Farazdaq indeed placed Muhammad at the beginning of the

Islamic era is clear from those verses in which he praises the caliph

Sulayman (r. 96-99/715-717). The poet describes him as a source

of mercy to humankind, whom God sent to heal all sore wounds,

like Muhammad whom God sent at a time of recess C a la jatrah),

when people were like beasts (bahii im:.

77

Here again

it

is clear that

Muhammad marks the revival of God's religion at a time of beast-

liness (that is, }ahit iyah) caused by the interval in the line of prophets.

Sulayman's mission is to maintain the survival of God's religion that

was revived through Muhammad, and eliminate all the wounds

of deviation from it. In short, his mission is to protect Muhammad's

legacy that has reached him through his own Umayyad ancestors.

Furthermore, Muhammad appears in Farazdaq's verses as the ulti-

mate origin of the Umayyad authority. Crone and Hinds would not

agree with this observation, because in their analysis of the Umayyad

poetry they contend that though Muhammad is now clearly invoked

to legitimate the caliphate, it is to God on the one hand and 'Uthman

77 Hammam ibn Ghiilib al-Farazdaq, Diuiin 'Beirut, Dar ~adir li-al-tiba'ah wa-l-

nashr, 1960), 2:309, 4-5.


23/28

9 URI RUBIN

on the other that the caliphs are directly indebted for their auiliority. i8

However, although 'Uthman features in Farazdaq as a model of

authority, he is not the ultimate one, because he in turn owes his

authority to Muhammad, who again appears as the first in the era

of the renewed religion of God. 'Uthman is mentioned here mainly

thanks to being an Umayyad ancestor of the Marwanis on the one

hand and the third of the Righteous Caliphs on the other. But the

first two Righteous Caliphs, Abu Bakr and 'Umar, are mentioned

too, and all three are considered as links in a hereditary chain of

chosen persons appointed by God to protect and look after Muham-

mad's legacy.

That this is indeed the case is indicated, to begin with, in another

verse praising the Umayyad caliph Sulayman. Farazdaq states here

that no shepherd equaling this caliph has risen upon earth since the

death of the Prophet Muhammad and 'Uthman. Thus 'Uthman

emerges as a link in a line of model leaders that begins with

Muhammad. Moreover, in another verse conveying the same idea,

, 'Uthman's name is not mentioned explicitly, only that of

Muhammad,

This time the poet addresses the caliph-Yazfd II (r. 101-) 051720':24),

saying: AfterMuhammad arid his Companions, Islam has riot found

a shepherd like you for the religion.T Clearly the Umayyad caliph

is imagined here as a link belonging to a successive chain beginning

with Muhammad and continued through his Companions, i.e. the

Righteous Caliphs.

The Umayyads placed the Righteous Caliphs, namely, Abu Bakr,

'Umar and 'Uthman (Alr was not recognized

by

them as a legiti-

mate caliph) as intermediaries between themselves and the Prophet.

They saw in them spiritual models and considered themselves heirs

to their religious legacy.

As for the first caliph, Abu Bakr, Farazdaq associates him with

Muhammad's legacy. The poet describes him as an

imam

and a scholar

(Ciilim)

who is authorized more than anyone else to interpret

(ta wfl)

what Muhammad has enjoined

(wa~~ii)upon

the people. The

Umayyads themselves, says Farazdaq, are heirs to the

toasiyah .

of the

Second of the Two after Muhammad

(t h 'i in f ith n ay n ba'da M u h a m -

78 Crone and Hinds,

G od's C a lip h, 3 1.

79

al-Farazdaq,

Dlwiin

2:89, 6.

80 al-Farazdaq, Dtuan , 2:352, 9.

81 al-Farazdaq, Dius in , 2:62, 7.


24/28


95

m a d i n ) . 8 2

This is Abu Bakr's well-known Qur'anic epithet; it was

applied to him to assert that he was the first legitimate caliph after

Muhammad. The allusion to Abu Bakr's wO.$ryah is an explicit indi-

cation of the fact that the Umayyads saw themselves heirs to his

religious legacy. Farazdaq sees in Abu Bakr, together with 'Uthman,

the origin of the Marwani power, and confers further honorific titles

on them. Abu Bakr is the Prophet's

khaut

( friend ), and 'Uthman

is his Muhajir [for his hijrah to Abyssinia].

As for 'Umar, he is presented as the founder of the

sunnalz

which

was continued by the Umayyad caliph Sulayman, who in turn also

acted on the model of'Vthman. The verse conveying this idea re-

fers to 'Vmar as Faruq. Farazdaq also praises the caliph Hisham

(r. 105-1251724-43) as one who has adhered to the

sunnalz

of Abu

Bakr and 'Umar. Their

Sunnah

cures sick souls.

Just like the antediluvian patriarchs, the Vmayyads too possessed

emblems of authority which came down to them from previous gen-

erations, and more specifically, from Muhammad. To begin with,

the Vmayyads claimed possession of the symbolic sword of Muhammad .

.In a poem addressed to the caliph Walrd

.n

(r.125-1261743-44),

Farazdaqstates that this caliph has fought the infidels with the s~ord

with which Muhammad had fought his enemies in Badr. Badr is

the place where the Muslims won their greatest victory over Quraysh

in 2/624. The recurrence of this name in Farazdaq's poetry indicates

that Muhammad's conquests in Arabia became the ultimate model

of the most crucial aspect of the spread of Islam under the Umayyads,

n am ely , holy war. M uhammad's sword that was raised in Badr

became the

symbol

of the warlike. mission that the Vmayyads con-

tinued to fulfill in the wake of Muhammad's victories.

Farazdaq mentions the same symbolic sword of Muhammad in

other verses praising the military achievements of the caliphs Yazid

II,BBand

Hisham.P?

Elsewhere Farazdaq describes the same sword

as the sword of prophethood , which means that Muhammad's

82

al-Farazdaq,

Diwiill

1:78, .13 (Walid b. 'Abd al-Malik).

83 Compare Qur'an 9:40.

8t al-Farazdaq, Diwlill 1:250, 6 (Walid b. 'Abd al-Malik).

8; al-Farazdaq, Diuan, 2:101, 7 (Sula}man).

86

al-Farazdaq, Diwiill 2:29+, 11 (Hisham),

87

al-Farazdaq, Dfwiin, 2:92, 4.

88

al-Farazdaq,

Dfwiin,

2:353, 11.

89 al-Farazdaq, Dtuuin, 2:189, 15.

90 al-Farazdaq, Diioan, 2:12+, 3.


25/28

96

URI RUBIN

prophetic powers continue to work through the Umayyad military

thrust. 'What is so significant about this sword is that Farazdaq

describes it not only as the sword of Muhammad but also as the

sword of God by which He defeated the infidels in Badr.P This

means that God's and Muhammad's names are interchangeable, so

that the caliphs, who gained possession of this sword with its two

interchanging names, are, technically speaking, God's deputies as

well as Muhammad's heirs.

Thus it becomes clear yet again that God and Muhammad are

complementary components of the idea behind the title God's caliph.

A caliph of this kind is one who has inherited from the Prophet

Muhammad the mission of protecting God's religion.

The Umayyads had in their possession not merely the symbolic

relics of God and Muhammad but also some concrete emblems of

authority that were believed to have comedown to them in a suc-

cessive hereditary line originating in Muhammad, These emblems

are the minbar ( pulpit ), the staff and the signet ring (khiitam). These

objects are mentioned, to begin with, in a verse praising the Marwanids

a s those who have inherited the two pieces of wood'rand the signet

ring (u :a -m an w arith a a l -cudqyn iwa-a l - kM.tam):92 This verse is quoted ill

L is iin a Va ra b,9 3

and the term the two pieces of wood

(CUdiini)

is

explained there as the pulpit (minbar) and the staff (Ca~ii)of the

Prophet.? Elsewhere Farazdaq mentions the minbar by name, and

describes it as part of the legacy of kings which upon their death

they fori-Yard to their heirs.P

The direct origin of the two pieces of wood and the signet ring

is Marwan, as Farazdaq indicates elsewhere, but they are being for-

warded in a hereditary line beginning with Muhammad. This is indi-

cated in another poetic piece in which Farazdaq alludes to the

minbar .

He first describes the caliph Walid II as Muhammad's legatee

(wat[y

'a hd A lu bammad ), then goes on to say that seven caliphs (beginning

with Marwan) inherited the caliphate before it reached Walid, and

that they in turn had inherited it from 'Uthman whose legacy in

91

al-Farazdaq,

Diuiin

2:312, 11-12.

92 al-Farazdaq, Diuiiin, 1:59, 6,

93 Ibn Manzur, Lisan al- 'arab (Beirut: Dar ~adir, 1955-1956), s.v. Cud .

Ii See also E.W. Lane, An A rabic -English Lex icon, edited by Stanley Lane-Poole

(London: Williams and Norgate, 1863-93), s.v, 'Ud.

95 al-Farazdaq, Diuiin 1:348, 5.

96

al-Farazdaq, Diuian, 2:302, 3-4.


26/28

,

I.

?ROPHETS A. ID CALIPHS

97

turn was the legacy of our chosen prophet. All these caliphs are

described as having in their possession. the minbar from which they

used to deliver their sermons and exercise their authority over their

subjects.

97

The

minbar I S

no doubt considered here pari of the legacy

that the caliphs inherited from Muhammad through 'Uthman.

That the

minbar

held by the Umayyads was indeed considered part

of Muhammad's legacy is corroborated in traditions. In one of them,

Muhammad himself foresees their possession of it, but the manner

in which they use his

minbar

is despicable. The Prophet sees the

Umayyads (the Marwanis) in his dream as they jump up and down

his

minbar

like monkeys. While asserting the fact that the Umayyads

possessed what was considered Muhammad's

minbar ,

this tradition

reflects anti-Umayyad criticism directed against the manner in which

these arrogant caliphs desec~ated Muhammad's legacy.

As for the staff inherited by the Umayyads, Farazdaq explicitly

describes it as belonging to Muhammad (C~i i

al-nabfyi) ,

and as-

together with the signet ring-providing the basis for the authority

of Yazid II. Farazdaqgoes on to say that when the people see what

is on the signet ring, the-memory-of Muhammad is not forgotten

(id ha ra 'a u'm a

fi-hi

dh i k i uMu~a ,nmad in .l am yun~a li ). g g -

What could he seen on the signet ring is revealed in a tradition

traced back to Ibn 'Umar (d. 73/692) in which it is related that the

ring was made of silver, and was passed on from the Prophet to Abu

Bakr, then to 'Umar, then to 'Uthman. 'Uthman dropped it by acci-

dent into a well in Medina (Bfr Arfs). The text that was engraved

on the ring read: M uham mad rasiil Al lah : Muhammad Messenger of

God. lOOIn a tradition of Anas b. Malik (Basran Companion, d. ca.

91-951709-13) relating the same story, it is added that each of the

three words was placed in a separate line. In some versions it is

added that after the loss of the original ring, 'Uthman made a new

one with the same inscription.

102

The fact that 'Uthman lost Muhammad's ring probably symbolizes

the loss of authority in the eyes of 'Uthman's subjects, as indicated

97 al-Farazdaq, Diuiin 1:336,4-9.

98 Uri Rubin, B etu ee n B ib le a nd Qyl a n: th e C hild ren o j Isra el a nd th e Isla m ic & flm age

(Princeton, The Darwin Press, 1999),

2 2 - 1 - .

99 al-Farazdaq,

Diuiin

2 : 1 2 5 3-4.

100

al-Bukharl,

a l - S a I z i o ,

7:201 (77:46), and 202 (77:50).

101 al-Bukhari, a l - S a W z , 7:203 (77:55).

102

Abu Dawud,

a l -Sunan ,

2:406 (33: 1-.


27/28

98

URI RUBIN

in a remark made by Abu Dawud (d. 275/888) on this story. He

says that people did not dispute 'Uthman until the ring fell off his

finger. \0 3 The story could also imply that the ring possessed by the

Umayyads was not the original Muhammadan one, but merely the

copy made by 'Uthman. In that case, the traces of anti-Umayyad

bias are clearly noticed here as well.

Beyond the political tendency, these traditions reveal what Farazdaq

had in mind when saying that when people saw the ring held by

the Umayyad caliphs, they did not forget Muhammad. They saw

the three words: M uham m ad R asu l Allah, and this means that the

Umayyads, even as God's caliphs, did not forget that the origin of

their authority was Muhammad, the messenger of God.

Of course, critics of the Umayyads could claim otherwise, namely,

that the Umayyads did forget the Prophet, and only saw themselves

as God's deputies, not Muhammad's. That this was indeed imputed

to them, is indicated in some letters attributed to the notorious al-

I:ia.iiaj,

04

in which the Umayyads come out as extremely arrogant

and corrupt. But these letters only reflect the views of anti-Umayyad

. groups who have :put these letters into circulation.:. . . . ....

. IiI sum, Muhammad's symholsof authority, of which the Umayyads

boasted, indicate that they considered themselves links in a succes-

sive chain of leaders stemming from

Muhammad,

The Umayyad claim to Muhammad's legacy was essential to main-

tain their link to the universal chain of the prophets, the bearers of

the authority, which was now in their own hands. This aspect too

comes out not only in Walrd's letter but also in Farazdaq's poetry.

In his verses reference i \-made mainly to David and Solomon. The

reason why they are given predominance over other prophets is that

David was the first to introduce dynastic government among the

people of Israel. He bequeathed his kingdom to his son Solomon

and this is why this pair of Israelite kings became essential models

for the Umayyads. Moreover, David's house became the focus ofJew-

ish messianic hopes, so that the Umayyads too gained a messianic

glamour by comparing themselv~s to

David.

The dynastic aspect of the allusion to David and Solomon is clear

in a verse in which Farazdaq states that the caliph Walid I

inher-

10 3 Abu Dawfid, a l -Sunan; 2 :406.

10 +

Discussed in Crone and Hinds,

G o d's C a lip h,

28-29, where these letters seem

to be taken

as

authentic.


28/28

. I


99

ited government

(mulk )

from his father like Solomon from David,

and this was a bequest from God

(n ib lan m in Alliihi).I

Q

5

This indicates

that Solomon's authority is based on inheritance as well as on God's

will, which means yet again that the Umayyad caliph too is at once

God's deputy as well as his father's heir. Elsewhere Farazdaq defines

the manner in which David's son succeeded his father as an ideal

sunnah ,

which provides the right guidance to anyone who follows it.106

Outside the realm of poetry, the hereditary model of David and

Solomon recurs in a tradition recorded in the

Mus tadrak

by al-Hakim

al-NfsabiirI (d. 40411013-14). It relates that God chose David to be

His prophet and messenger, and He gathered for him light and is-

dom, and revealed to him the Zabur (that is, the Psalms), adding it

to the scriptures already revealed to previous prophets, 'When David

was about to die, God commanded him to bequeath the light of

God

(niir

Allah)

as well as the hidden and the revealed knowledge

to his son .Solomon, and so he did.107

In this tradition David and Solomon have become links in a uni-

versal chain of a religious legacy that is being passed on from gen-

erationto generation ..It contains emblems of prophecy and religious

knowledge, such as light and re..ve~ed scriptures, which were already

in the possession of previous messengers of God. Thus the concept

of hereditary authority that is forwarded from generation to gener-

ation has been clearly demonstrated for the Umayyads,

103

al-Farazdaq,

Diuiin,

2:145, 7-8. Compare Crone and Hinds,

God's Cal iph , 31

~~ .

IIlti. al-Farazdaq,

Dfwiin,

1:247, 10.. Compare Crone and Hinds;

God's Cal iph , 34-.

The 'Abbasids, too, saw themselves as heirs to the .prophets, and the caliph al-

. Mansur (reigned between 136-58{754-75), for example, was described as holding

the legacy

(iT/h)

of Solomon, Job and Joseph. See Crone and Hinds,

God's Cal iph ,

81 with

n.

146.

107

Muhammad b. 'Abd Allah al-Hakim al-Nisabiiri,

a l- M us ta dr ak 'a lii a l- ~a bfI;a Jn

fi al-badftlz (Riyadh: Makrabat al-nasr al-hadithah, n.d.), 2:587. The i s n a d : Muhammad

b. Hassan

+-

Muhammad h. Ja'far h. Muhammad

+-

his father. See also Rubin,

Documents

Umayyadsreduced.86223320